Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: Non-Building seimic analysis[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
- Subject: Re: Non-Building seimic analysis
- From: "Bill Sherman" <SHERMANWC(--nospam--at)cdm.com>
- Date: 16 Sep 98 10:11:47 -0400
Chris Wood wrote: >Does anyone know what "normal operating contents" is as far as dry storage in a cylindrical hopper. I am dealing with an engineer that considers it to 80% of the material weight that the hopper can hold. Also, what would Rw be if the hopper is supported on a concentrically braced frames (WF columns and beams with angle bracing). < I get the impression the other engineer may be using 80% as "normal operating contents" based on an assumption that an earthquake is not likely to occur when the hopper is full, i.e. the hopper is not "normally" completely full. But I do not think this is the intent of "normal operating contents" - I would use the maximum contents that the hopper is intended to hold under normal operating conditions (e.g. ignore unusual conditions such as "overflow" conditions). I would use the R-value as for bins and hoppers in the table for nonbuilding structures. Harold - perhaps you could shed some light on why "vessels" and "hoppers" on braced or unbraced legs have different R-values? It seems that the structural system is similar, although the vessel containing fluid would also involve "sloshing".
- Prev by Subject: Re: Non-Building seimic analysis
- Next by Subject: RE: Non-Building seimic analysis
- Previous by thread: Re: Non-Building seimic analysis
- Next by thread: RE: Non-Building seimic analysis